Calandale's turn in the spotlight

[SovaNu]

either and both. said the excited badger to the pervy cow.

[Calandale]

Well, I WAS told to make friends with
the badger, but I didn't know 'twas
reproductively.

[Parts]

Did your area have any flooding?  The news makes it out like it's everywhere in the NW

[Calandale]

Did your area have any flooding?  The news makes it out like it's everywhere in the NW

Actually, we've been having a pretty dry winter,
this year. It's only been raining about half the time. 

[SovaNu]

we're gonna have a cowger. said the badger to the pregnant cow.

[Calandale]

or a baw.

[SovaNu]

or codger. said the happy father badger. a fadger.

[Calandale]

Or fagder.

[SovaNu]

that's not right. said the fadger to the cowther.

[Calandale]

watch out for a carronade.

[SovaNu]

i'll defend myself with a peald.

[Calandale]

using tetrakis(ethylmethylamino)zirconium?

[odeon]

Indeed?

Who should run Intensitysquared?  (Voting closed: November 16, 2007, 09:54:36 AM)
The WC    - 9 (42.9%)
Elected admins    - 0 (0%)
The First Citizenvis the jolly despot + crew - 12 (57.1%)

Since just about everyone appears to be fucked off with this experiment in internets democracy and much needed attention appears to have been diverted from fun, games and scoring cheap but amusing points off each other by the interminable squabbling, who thinks its still worth bothering? Should we keep the WC, go back to the previous system, or leave the running of the site to the mighty webmasters?

Vote despotism. You know it makes sense. Thumbs Up

Three options, fairly clearly spelled out.
Now, the only one which made any
sense as "go back to the previous system"
was the Elected admins.

Despotism won, fair and square.

AND it requires a despotic act
to overturn such a victory. 

Actually, I'm rather disturbed that you're
NOT following what was the stated will of
the people. It should be worth a try, to run
the site without any such input.

::sigh::

Whatever. Can't really say I care about your opinion, now.

Good way of dealing with someone being right.
Right up there with 

The idiocy is, that it mainly works.

Moving this to your thread...

Actually, the reason I don't much care for your opinion is best described using another emoticon. This one:



You killed the subject, long ago. You, more than anyone else, were responsible for the demise of the World Council. Deal with it.

And no; you're not right. You never were.

[Calandale]

The point that I made there was entirely correct.
How can you NOT see that the vote was AGAINST
elected admins, as well as the WC?

Like most of my points, I fear you are just too blind
to see it.

But thanks for moving this discussion out of QC's thread.

[odeon]

But see, Cal, this is about as far as it can go because now all we can do is something like this:

"NO, I can't see that at all. You're WRONG."
"But it WAS against elected admins."
"Listen to what Dunc and I've been saying."
"You're both too blind to see it."
...
...
...
...



We reverted to the pre-WC days. That's it. Now, if you'll excuse me, I need to go and worship Our Great And Wise Leader. He's going to be so mad if I forget, and you people are the ones that will suffer the most.